CN115129496A

CN115129496A - Information processing apparatus, recording medium, and information processing method

Info

Publication number: CN115129496A
Application number: CN202110907316.9A
Authority: CN
Inventors: 井坂洋一
Original assignee: Fujifilm Business Innovation Corp
Current assignee: Fujifilm Business Innovation Corp
Priority date: 2021-03-24
Filing date: 2021-08-09
Publication date: 2022-09-30
Also published as: JP2022148608A; US20220311873A1; EP4064054A1

Abstract

The invention provides an information processing apparatus, a recording medium, and an information processing method. An information processing apparatus includes a processor that stores failure information, and when a failure occurs in a series of processes executed according to a definition relating to an order of a plurality of unit processing units, presents failure information corresponding to the failure that has occurred to a user among the failure information, and when there is no failure information corresponding to the failure, stores the unit processing unit in which the failure has occurred and a unit processing unit ahead of the unit processing unit in association with each other as new failure information.

Description

Information processing apparatus, recording medium, and information processing method

Technical Field

The present invention relates to an information processing apparatus, a recording medium having a program recorded thereon, and an information processing method.

Background

Patent document 1 discloses an information processing apparatus having: a reception unit that, when a failure occurs in a job performed according to a flow, receives a response to be applied to the job; an extracting unit that extracts, from a storage unit that stores a plurality of jobs in which a failure has occurred, another job similar to a previous-stage process in which the failure has occurred in the flow; and a presentation unit that presents the job extracted by the extraction unit and that acceptably presents an instruction as to whether or not to apply the correspondence to the job.

Patent document 2 discloses an information processing apparatus having: a storage unit that stores a type of an error in a job for causing a plurality of devices to cooperate and process, a handling process for the error, and information indicating whether the handling process is necessary or optional, in association with each other; a control unit that controls processing of a job instructed by a user; a detection unit that detects that an error has occurred in processing of the job; an extraction unit that extracts error handling processing corresponding to the type of the error from the storage unit; an error processing unit that takes the error handling processing extracted by the extraction unit as a job and causes the control unit to control the processing of the job; a user detection unit that detects that a user is present around the information processing apparatus; and a presentation unit that presents a plurality of error handling processes to a presentation device provided in the information processing device when the user detection unit detects a user, wherein the extraction unit extracts a user who has performed an error handling process corresponding to a type of the error and an instruction to execute a job in which the error has occurred, the error processing unit notifies the user of the plurality of error handling processes, causes the control unit to control the process of the job by using the error handling process selected by the user as the job, the error processing unit displays the user detected by the user detection unit and a screen corresponding to the error when information corresponding to the error handling process corresponding to the type of the error detected by the detection unit includes a selection, and the user detection unit does not detect the user, the error processing unit may be configured to notify the user who has instructed the job of the mail corresponding to the user and the error, and execute the error handling process corresponding to the error type if the selected process is not included, and further, the error processing unit may be configured to notify a producer of the handling process if the selected process is included in the information corresponding to the error handling process corresponding to the error type of the error detected by the detection unit and if the user does not instruct the handling process to be executed.

Patent document 3 discloses a job processing system for performing batch processing of jobs, including: a resource information acquiring unit that acquires, from the registered job flow, resource information in which a job to be processed by the job processing system and information on a resource used by the job are associated with each other; a failure influence detection unit that, when an abnormality occurs in any of the jobs being processed, refers to the used resource information, identifies a job related to a resource for which an error has occurred in the resource used by the job, and refers to processing order information of jobs registered in advance based on the job, thereby detecting the related job as an influenced job from among jobs scheduled to be processed later; and an output unit that outputs information relating to the affected work detected by the failure effect detection unit.

Documents of the prior art

Patent document

Patent document 1: japanese patent No. 6547649

Patent document 2: japanese patent No. 6617472

Patent document 3: japanese patent No. 4928480

Disclosure of Invention

However, after the workflow control system is released, a new plug-in may be added and embedded in the workflow. When a failure occurs during execution of the workflow to which the plug-in is added, the failure is treated as an unknown failure.

The workflow refers to a series of processes in which a plurality of processes are executed in accordance with a definition relating to a predetermined order, and the plug-in refers to software for adding to the workflow after the release so that a new process can be executed in the workflow.

An object of the present invention is to provide an information processing apparatus, a recording medium having a program recorded thereon, and an information processing method, which are capable of providing appropriate information to a user when a failure occurs in a series of processes including a process added by a user later, as compared with a case where information relating to the failure is provided based only on information stored before the user additional process.

An information processing apparatus according to a first aspect of the present invention includes a processor that stores failure information, and when a failure occurs in a series of processes executed according to a definition relating to an order of a plurality of unit processing units, presents failure information corresponding to the failure that has occurred to a user among the failure information stored in the processor, and when the failure information stored in the processor does not include failure information corresponding to the failure that has occurred, stores a unit processing unit in which the failure has occurred and a unit processing unit ahead of the unit processing unit in association with each other as new failure information.

In the information processing apparatus according to the second aspect of the present invention, when the failure information stored in the processor includes a plurality of pieces of failure information in which a predetermined number or more of the unit processing units in which a failure has occurred are identical to a plurality of pieces of failure information in which the unit processing units located before the unit processing units are identical to each other, the processor unifies the predetermined number or more of pieces of failure information.

In the information processing apparatus according to a third aspect of the present invention, the failure information includes information on a failure occurrence status of a unit processing unit in which a failure has occurred and input information of the unit processing unit, and the processor unifies the failure information of a predetermined number or more when the failure information stored in the processor includes a plurality of pieces of failure information in which the unit processing units in which a failure has occurred are the same, the unit processing units ahead of the unit processing units are different, and the information on the failure occurrence status and the input information are the same.

In the information processing apparatus according to the fourth aspect of the present invention, before executing the series of processes, the processor searches whether or not the same definition as the failure information relating the unit processing unit in which the failure has occurred and the unit processing unit located ahead of the unit processing unit is included in the definition, and presents the search result to the user.

In the information processing apparatus according to the fifth aspect of the present invention, when registering a definition relating to the order of the plurality of unit processing units, the processor searches whether or not the same definition as the failure information relating to the unit processing unit in which the failure has occurred and the unit processing unit located ahead of the unit processing unit is included in the definition, and presents the search result to the user.

In the information processing apparatus according to the sixth aspect of the present invention, the processor, when registering a definition relating to a combination of a plurality of unit processing units, searches whether or not the same definition as failure information relating a unit processing unit in which a failure has occurred and a unit processing unit located ahead of the unit processing unit is included in the definition, and when the search result indicates that the failure information is included, prohibits the reception of processing from a user.

A recording medium of a seventh aspect of the present invention records a program for causing a computer to execute the steps of: storing fault information; presenting, to a user, failure information corresponding to the failure that has occurred, among the stored failure information, when the failure has occurred in a series of processes executed according to a definition relating to an order of a plurality of unit processing units; and storing, when the stored failure information does not include failure information corresponding to the failure that has occurred, the unit processing unit in which the failure has occurred and the unit processing unit ahead of the unit processing unit in association with each other as new failure information.

An information processing method of an eighth aspect of the present invention includes: storing the fault information; presenting, to a user, failure information corresponding to the failure that has occurred, among the stored failure information, when the failure has occurred in a series of processes executed according to a definition relating to an order of a plurality of unit processing units; and when the stored failure information does not include failure information corresponding to the failure that has occurred, storing the unit processing unit in which the failure has occurred and the unit processing unit located ahead of the unit processing unit in association with each other as new failure information.

Effects of the invention

According to the first aspect, the seventh aspect, or the eighth aspect of the present invention, in the case where a failure occurs in a series of processes including a process added later by a user, it is possible to provide appropriate information to the user, as compared with the case where information relating to a failure is provided based only on information that has been stored before the user addition process.

According to the second aspect of the present invention, when there is the same failure information in which the predetermined number or more of the unit processing units in which the failure has occurred and the unit processing units ahead of the unit processing units are associated with each other, the failure information can be provided to the user in an easily understandable manner, as compared with a case where the predetermined number or more of the failure information is not provided in a lump.

According to the third aspect of the present invention, when there is the same failure information other than the failure information in which the predetermined number or more of the unit processing units having a failure and the unit processing units ahead of the unit processing units are associated with each other, the user can be provided with the failure information in an easily understandable manner as compared with a case where the predetermined number or more of the failure information is directly provided.

According to the fourth aspect of the present invention, it is possible to provide the user with the failure information before the series of processes is executed.

According to the fifth aspect of the present invention, in the case where the definition of the series of processes is determined by registration, it is possible to provide the user with the failure information.

According to the sixth aspect of the present invention, in the case where the definition of the series of processes is determined by registration, if there is failure information, the execution instruction of the processes may be prohibited.

Drawings

Embodiments of the present invention will be explained in detail based on the following figures, in which:

fig. 1 is a block diagram showing an information processing system as a whole according to an embodiment of the present invention.

Fig. 2 is a block diagram showing hardware of an information processing apparatus according to an embodiment of the present invention.

Fig. 3 is a block diagram showing the software configuration and functions of an information processing apparatus according to an embodiment of the present invention.

Fig. 4 is a flowchart showing the flow of operations of the entire information processing apparatus according to the first embodiment of the present invention.

Fig. 5 is an explanatory diagram showing a specific example of the operation flow in the first embodiment of the present invention.

Fig. 6 is a flowchart showing an operation flow in a normal state of a specific example in the first embodiment of the present invention.

Fig. 7 is a flowchart showing an operation flow when an error occurs in the first embodiment of the present invention.

Fig. 8 is an explanatory diagram showing a state in which data is added to the management table of the database in the first embodiment of the present invention.

Fig. 9 is an explanatory diagram showing a state where data is supplied from the management table of the database in the first embodiment of the present invention.

Fig. 10 is a flowchart showing an operation flow when an error occurs in the second embodiment of the present invention.

Fig. 11 is an explanatory diagram for explaining a third embodiment of the present invention.

Fig. 12 is a flowchart showing an operation flow of the third embodiment of the present invention.

Fig. 13 is a table showing a list of input information at the time of normal termination in the fourth embodiment of the present invention.

Fig. 14 is a table showing a list of alternative error information in the fourth embodiment of the present invention.

Fig. 15 is a flowchart showing an operation flow of the fourth embodiment of the present invention.

Fig. 16 is an explanatory view for explaining a fifth embodiment of the present invention.

Fig. 17 is an explanatory diagram for explaining a sixth embodiment of the present invention.

Fig. 18 is a flowchart showing an operation flow of the sixth embodiment of the present invention.

Fig. 19 is an explanatory diagram showing the contents of the substitute error E in the seventh embodiment of the present invention.

Fig. 20 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of a work flow having a part common to the substitute error E in the seventh embodiment of the present invention.

Fig. 21 is a flowchart showing an operation flow of the seventh embodiment of the present invention.

Fig. 22 is a flowchart showing an operation flow of the eighth embodiment of the present invention.

Description of the symbols

10 information processing system

12 server

14. 14 personal computer

16 image forming apparatus

18 network

20 image reading apparatus

24 memory

26 storage device

28 input/output interface

30 communication interface

32 bus

34 work flow definition management part

36 process definition repository

38 work flow management section

40 work flow development section

42 processing function management part

44 document repository

46 work flow definition generating part

48 work flow control part

50 error occurrence detection unit

52 error notification unit

54 substitute error analysis section

56 substitute error management section

58 Job history management section

60 plug-in registration section

Detailed Description

Embodiments of the present invention will be described in detail below with reference to the drawings.

FIG. 1 shows an overview of an information handling system 10 according to an embodiment of the present invention.

Server 12,

personal computers

14 and 14, and image forming apparatus 16, which constitute an information processing apparatus, are connected to information processing system 10 via network 18. The image forming apparatus 16 is a so-called multifunction peripheral having a printing function, a facsimile function, a scanning function, and the like, and is provided with an image reading apparatus 20 having an automatic document feeder. The network 18 may be a local area network or the internet.

Fig. 2 is a block diagram showing hardware of the server 12.

The server 12 includes a CPU (central Processing unit)22 as a processor, a memory 24, a storage device 26, an input/output interface 28, and a communication interface 30, and the CPU22, the memory 24, the storage device 26, the input/output interface 28, and the communication interface 30 are connected via a bus 32.

The CPU22 executes predetermined processing based on a control program stored in the memory 24. The storage device 26 is constituted by, for example, a hard disk, and stores necessary software and data. The storage device 26 stores documents, workflow definitions, and the like.

Fig. 3 is a block diagram showing the software configuration and function of the server 12.

The server 12 has a workflow definition management section 34, a flow definition repository 36, a workflow management section 38, a workflow deployment section 40, a processing function management section 42, and a document repository 44.

The repository is a data storage unit, and stores the job flow definition data in the flow definition repository 36, and stores the document data to be processed and the processed document data in the document repository 44.

The workflow definition managing section 34 has a workflow definition generating section 46. Which generates a workflow definition that has the role of a workflow template. The work flow generated by the work flow definition generating unit 46 is stored in the flow definition repository 36.

The workflow managing section 38 includes a workflow control section 48, an error occurrence detecting section 50 (hereinafter, a failure is referred to as an error), an error notifying section 52, a substitution error analyzing section 54, a substitution error managing section 56, and a job history managing section 58.

The workflow control section 48 expands the workflow in the workflow expansion section 40 based on the workflow definition managed by the flow definition repository 36, and controls transition between processing modules, states, and the like according to various triggers.

The error occurrence detection unit 50 has the following functions: when an error occurs during job execution, a pattern of the occurred error (e.g., error occurrence address and log output data) is detected and used as a trigger for error notification.

The error notification unit 52 receives the error detection by the error occurrence detection unit 50, and directly notifies it if it is an error embedded in the system, or notifies an error corresponding to the search result of the substitute error management unit 56 if it is not. If no substitution error is found, a substitution error registration is prompted (registered substitution error information may also be automatically registered and notified), and if a substitution error is found, the found substitution error is notified.

The substitute error analysis unit 54 analyzes the information managed by the substitute error management unit 56 at a predetermined timing, and integrates the substitute errors or notifies the integration of the substitute errors.

Here, the substitute error is an example of failure information, and is not error data itself but data indicating each condition in which an error has occurred. The substitute error is defined for an error that occurs due to addition of a plug-in.

The substitute error management unit 56 has a function of associating an error occurrence module, an error occurrence pattern, input information, a combination of modules ahead of the flow of the error occurrence module (hereinafter referred to as a front module group) and substitute error information to add, update, and search.

The workflow expansion unit 40 is a storage area in which a function is loaded from the processing function management unit 42 and the workflow selected from the flow definition repository 36 by the workflow control unit 48 is expanded. For example, in the case of the workflow 1, the process modules executed in the workflow are sequentially developed as the first module a and the next module b. Each module is an example of a unit processing unit.

The processing function management section 42 manages processing functions registered in various libraries or the like, and develops a specified processing function as a processing module to be executed in a workflow in the workflow development section 40 in accordance with an instruction from the workflow control section 48. The processing function management unit 42 includes a plug-in registration unit 60. A plug-in having, for example, a processing function X is registered in the plug-in registration unit 60. The plug-in includes a case where the processing function itself is added and a case where a registered processing function is provided with a new processing function. The document repository 44 stores documents as processing objects and processed documents.

Fig. 4 shows an operation flow of the entire information processing apparatus according to the first embodiment.

First, in step S10, N processing modules constituting a workflow are connected. X denotes the order of the processing modules. In step S10, X is set to 1.

In the next step S12, it is determined whether or not X > N. If it is determined in step S12 that X > N, all the processing modules are executed, and the process ends. On the other hand, if it is determined in step S12 that X > N is not present, the process proceeds to step S14.

In step S14, the X-th process module is executed, and the process proceeds to the next step S16. In step S16, it is determined whether an error has occurred. If it is determined in step S16 that an error has occurred, the process proceeds to step S18, and the process at the time of error processing, which will be described later, is executed. On the other hand, if it is determined in step S16 that an error has not occurred, the process proceeds to step S20, increases X by 1, and returns to step S12.

Fig. 5 shows a specific example of the first embodiment.

In this specific example, target document data is retrieved from the document repository 44, subjected to noise removal, tilt correction, OCR (Optical Character Reader, which is simply referred to as a process of converting image data into Character data) and translation, and stored in the document repository 44.

That is, in the processing at the normal time, as shown in fig. 6, noise removal is performed in step S22, tilt correction is performed in step S24, OCR is performed in step S26, translation is performed in step S28, and the processing ends.

Fig. 7 shows details of the processing at the time of error processing in the above-described steps.

When an error occurs in the processing block, it is first determined in step S30 whether the error is known in the system. If it is determined in step S30 that an error is known, the process proceeds to step S32, where a user (user) is notified of the error known to the system. Here, the error is known to mean, for example, that the error has been registered in the device in the workflow management system. In other words, a known error is, for example, an error that does not occur due to a newly added plug-in.

On the other hand, if it is determined in step S30 that the error is not known in the system (is an unknown error), the flow proceeds to step S34. In step S34, the generation condition (generation module, front module group, input information, etc.) detected by the system is used as a search condition to search for a substitute error from the database. Here, the front module group is an example of a front unit processing unit, and means one or more modules located in front of a generation module, which is a module in which an error has occurred in the workflow.

In addition, regarding the generation conditions, detailed description will be made below.

In the next step S36, it is determined whether the occurred error coincides with a substitute error. The coincidence of the substitute error with the generated error means, for example, a case where the generation condition of the generated error coincides with the generation condition of the substitute error added to the database. If it is determined in step S36 that the data matches, the process proceeds to step S38, where the user is notified of a matching substitute error.

On the other hand, if it is determined in step S36 that the occurred error does not match the substitute error, the flow proceeds to step S40. In this step S40, the system manager (developer as the case may be) examines the cause based on the occurrence condition detected by the system, and in the next step S42, determines whether or not the cause can be specified. If the cause cannot be determined in step S42, the process ends as an unknown error. On the other hand, if the cause can be determined in this step S42, the flow proceeds to step S44. In step S44, a unique substitute error is defined, the record is added to the database together with the occurrence condition, and the process ends.

Next, a specific example of the case where an unknown error occurs will be described.

In fig. 5, it is assumed that an error occurs in the OCR processing module.

In step S40, the input information, the error occurrence pattern, and the front module group are investigated for the error of the OCR module. As a result, if the cause can be determined, the substitute error is registered in the database in step S44.

Fig. 8 shows an example of the data structure of the management table of the database.

The input information includes processing parameters, hash values of input files, and the like. The error occurrence pattern includes log output information, an error occurrence address, and the like. The front module is a module that performs processing before the processing module in which the error has occurred, and here, the front module is a noise removal module and a tilt correction module that are located in front of the OCR processing module in which the error has occurred, and here, the substitute error is registered as an error B.

Next, it is assumed that the job flow is executed under the same condition.

Then, an error occurs in the OCR processing module, and a search of the database is performed in step S34. In the next step S36, the error B matches, and as shown in fig. 9, the user is prompted for the error B in step S38. Although the user may be directly prompted with the occurrence condition of the error B, the occurrence condition may be explained or the cause of occurrence may be indicated.

Fig. 10 shows an operation flow of the entire information processing apparatus according to the second embodiment.

The difference from the first embodiment is that step S46 is provided. In the first embodiment, if the cause of the error cannot be determined, the processing is performed as an unknown error, whereas in the second embodiment, if the cause cannot be determined in step S42, the processing proceeds to step S46.

In step S46, it is determined whether or not it is desired to determine an error based on the error occurrence condition. The determination condition is determined by setting, and may be set to be true or false at all times, or may be set to be true in the case of a specific process module. In the next subsequent processing, an error under the same occurrence condition can be identified and used for the cause determination in the future. If it is determined in step S46 that an error is determined based on the error occurrence condition, the process proceeds to step S44, a unique substitute error is defined, and the record is appended to the database together with the error occurrence condition.

Note that, the same steps as those in the first embodiment are denoted by the same reference numerals as those in fig. 7, and description thereof is omitted.

Fig. 11 and 12 show a third embodiment.

In the third embodiment, the database is subjected to collective processing for substitution errors based on data other than the front module group.

That is, as shown in fig. 11, data other than the front module group, that is, data such as the generation module, the processing parameter as the input information, and the log output as the error generation pattern are all the same, and the error B, the error C, and the error D, all of which have the same condition, are unified as the error E. That is, in this case, since there are a plurality of substitute errors whose data other than the front module group match as the error occurrence condition, it is possible to estimate that the error occurrence is not related to the front module and to present or execute the unification of the substitute errors. For error E, the front module group is registered as a wildcard because it is determined to be identical regardless of the front module group. The unification processing is performed at a predetermined timing. For example, as the error occurrence condition, a substitute error in which data other than the front module group matches is present for a predetermined number of times.

Fig. 12 shows an operation flow of the third embodiment.

First, in step S48, x is set to 1. x denotes the order of the records of the replacement error registered in the database. x-1 refers to the first record of a replacement error registered in the database.

In the next step S50, the number N of registered substitute errors is acquired from the database. In the next step S52, it is determined whether x.ltoreq.N. If it is determined in this step S52 that x is not more than N, the search is terminated for all substitution errors, and the process proceeds to step S54. In step S54, the x-th record is acquired from the database, and condition C is generated in which the substitute error and the front module group are removed from the record.

In the next step S56, it is determined whether or not the condition C generated in step S54 exists in the condition list L. If it is determined in this step S56 that the condition C exists in the condition list L, the flow proceeds to step S58, increases x by 1, and returns to step S52.

If it is determined in step S56 that the condition C does not exist in the condition list L, the flow proceeds to step S60, the condition C is saved in the condition list L, and the database is retrieved under the condition.

In the next step S62, it is determined whether or not the number of search items of the result searched in step S60 is equal to or greater than a predetermined threshold. If it is determined in step S62 that the number of search items is not equal to or greater than the threshold value, that is, the number of search items is less than the threshold value, the routine proceeds to step S58, increments x by 1, and returns to step S52. On the other hand, if it is determined in step S62 that the number of search items is equal to or greater than the threshold value, the process proceeds to step S64, and the manager is presented with the substitution error as a whole.

In the next step S66, it is determined whether the administrator has instructed unification of substitute errors, and if not, the flow proceeds to step S58, x is incremented by 1, and the flow returns to step S52. On the other hand, if it is determined in step S66 that the administrator has instructed consolidation of the substitution error, the flow proceeds to step S68, and a record consisting of a new substitution error E, a condition C, and a front module group as a wildcard is registered in the database. Further, in the next step S70, the replacement error E is saved in the additional replacement error list M, the process proceeds to step S58, x is incremented by 1, and the process returns to step S52.

When x is increased by such processing, it is finally determined in step S52 that x is not equal to or less than N, and the processing for the number of registered items N is ended. If it is determined in step S52 that x is not equal to or less than N, the process proceeds to step S72, where the database is sequentially searched for each condition included in the condition list L, records in the search result that are not included in the additional alternative error list M in the alternative error list M are deleted, and the process ends. Thus, a database with unified substitution errors is formed as shown in fig. 11.

Fig. 13 to 15 show a fourth embodiment.

In the fourth embodiment, when the substitute error occurrence pattern matches, notification is performed before execution of the processing module.

In the fourth embodiment, as shown in fig. 13, a list of input information at the time of normal completion is created in advance. The list of input information at the time of normal termination includes a processing module, a processing parameter, and a front module group.

Here, it is assumed that the same work flow as that shown in fig. 5 is to be executed. That is, each process of noise removal, tilt correction, OCR, and translation is to be performed in order. Wherein, the processing parameters are set as e: "yyy". On the other hand, as shown in fig. 14, the alternate error information list has registered therein the generation module OCR, the processing parameter e: "yyy", the front module group is a substitute error for "noise removal, tilt correction", as error B.

Therefore, the job flow to be executed may generate an error in the OCR, and further, since the processing parameter e: "yyy" is not present in the processing parameters at the time of normal end, and therefore the possibility of generating an error is higher, in which case OCR will not be performed and instead error B is notified to, for example, the user.

However, in order to further improve the accuracy, the present notification may be started after the number of normal end pieces and the number of times of occurrence of the substitution error after the OCR execution exceed a predetermined threshold. The notification may be presented not only to the user but also to the administrator as a possibility of specification incompletion.

Fig. 15 shows an operation flow of the fourth embodiment.

First, in step S74, the execution processing module is set to a (OCR in the above-mentioned specific example), the input information is set to B (e: "yyy" in the above-mentioned specific example), and the front module group is set to C (noise removal, tilt correction in the above-mentioned specific example). In the next step S76, a search result X based on the a and C conditions is acquired from the input information list at the time of normal completion.

In the next step S78, it is determined whether X includes B. If it is determined in step S78 that X includes B, the flow proceeds to step S80, and processing block a is executed. In the next step S82, it is determined whether or not the end is normal. If it is determined in step S82 that the process is normally ended, the process proceeds to next step S84, where each data is written in the list of input information at the time of normally ending and the process is ended. On the other hand, if it is determined in step S82 that abnormal termination, that is, an error has occurred, the process at the time of the error process is executed in the next step S86, and the process is terminated.

If it is determined at step S78 that X does not contain B, the routine proceeds to step S88, where A, B, C is used as a condition to retrieve a substitute error from the database, and a retrieval result Y is obtained. In the next step S90, it is determined whether Y is present. If it is determined in step S90 that Y is not present, the process proceeds to step S80, and the process block a is executed. On the other hand, if it is determined in step S90 that Y is present, the process proceeds to step S92. In step S92, it is determined whether or not the number of occurrences of Y is Ty or more. Ty is the number of occurrences set for each substitution error. If it is determined in step S92 that the number of occurrences of Y is less than Ty, the process proceeds to step S80, and process block a is executed. On the other hand, if it is determined in step S92 that the number of occurrences of Y is Ty or more, the routine proceeds to step S94. In step S94, it is determined whether the number of xs is equal to or greater than Tx. Tx is the number of normal executions set for each combination of A, C. If it is determined in step S94 that the number of X pieces is equal to or greater than Tx, the routine proceeds to step S96, where a substitution error Y is notified, and the process ends. On the other hand, if it is determined in step S94 that the number of X pieces is less than Tx, the process proceeds to step S80, and the processing block a is executed.

Ty, Tx as the threshold values may also be set uniformly, not for each alternative error or for each combination of A, C.

Fig. 16 shows an outline of the fifth embodiment.

In this fifth embodiment, an error code and an event are defined for an unknown error.

For example, when an error occurs in OCR, OxOOff is recorded as an unknown error in the database before the definition is added, and then the definition is added, and the definition is added as the error code OxO201 in the database. A "parameter b is an illegal value" is additionally registered as an event for the added error code OxO201, and a failure countermeasure that can be uniquely specified is implemented. For example, if an external system receives such an error code, no parsing of the error information (log, etc.) by the external system is required since the event has already been determined.

Fig. 17 and 18 show a sixth embodiment.

In the sixth embodiment, unified processing of the substitute error is performed in the database based on the data of the generating module and the front module group.

As shown in fig. 17, for example, when a plurality of substitute errors such as an error B, an error C, and an error D are registered for the generating module, the generating module is OCR, the front module group is noise-removed, and the face recognition, when input information (for example, processing parameters) and an error generation pattern (for example, log output) other than the generating module and the front module group are different from each other, it is possible to estimate that the front module group is a flow definition of invalidation as a cause of error generation, and to present or execute processing for making the substitute errors the same. Here, the input information and the error occurrence pattern are unified as a substitute error E for the wildcard.

In addition, similarly to the fourth embodiment, a list of input information at the time of normal termination may be created in advance, and it may be confirmed that there is no matching pattern in the list of input information at the time of normal termination. Instead of setting the input information and the error generation mode as wildcards, a flag may be provided to handle the parts other than the generation module and the front module group as matching ones.

Fig. 18 shows an operation flow of the sixth embodiment.

First, in step S98, x is set to 1. x denotes the order of records registered in the database. x 1 refers to the first record registered in the database.

In the next step S100, the number N of registered substitute errors is acquired from the database. In the next step S102, it is determined whether x is equal to or less than N. If it is determined in this step S102 that x is not more than N, the search is not ended for all substitution errors, and the process proceeds to step S104. In step S104, the x-th record is acquired from the database, and the condition C including the generation module and the front module group is generated based on the record.

In the next step S106, it is determined whether or not the condition C generated in step S104 exists in the condition list L. If it is determined in step S106 that the condition C exists in the condition list L, the process proceeds to step S108, increases x by 1, and returns to step S102.

If it is determined in step S106 that the condition C does not exist in the condition list L, the process proceeds to step S110, the condition C is saved in the condition list L, and the database is retrieved under the condition.

In the next step S112, it is determined whether or not the number of searches for the result searched in step S110 is equal to or greater than a predetermined threshold. If it is determined in step S112 that the number of search results is not equal to or greater than the threshold value, that is, the number of search results is lower than the threshold value, the process proceeds to step S108, and x is incremented by 1, and the process returns to step S102. On the other hand, if it is determined in step S112 that the number of search items is equal to or greater than the threshold value, the process proceeds to step S114, and the administrator is presented with the substitution error as a whole.

In the next step S116, it is determined whether or not the administrator has instructed unification of substitute errors, and if not, the process proceeds to step S108, increases x by 1, and returns to step S102. On the other hand, if it is determined in step S116 that the administrator has instructed the unification of the substitute errors, the process proceeds to step S118, and a record including the new substitute error E, the condition C, and the processing parameter as the wildcard is registered in the database. Further, in the next step S120, the substitute error E is stored in the additional substitute error list M, the process proceeds to step S108, x is incremented by 1, and the process returns to step S102.

When x is increased by such processing, it is finally determined in step S102 that x is not smaller than N, and the processing for registering the number of pieces N is ended. If it is determined in step S102 that x is not equal to or less than N, the process proceeds to step S122, where the database is sequentially searched for each condition included in the condition list L, records in the search result that are not included in the additional alternative error list M in the alternative error list M are deleted, and the process ends. Thus, a database in which the substitution errors are unified is formed as shown in fig. 17.

Fig. 19 to 21 show a seventh embodiment.

In the seventh embodiment, whether an error occurs is confirmed before executing a job flow.

As shown in fig. 19, an error E is registered in the database. The module for generating the error E is OCR, and the front module group is noise removal and face recognition. Therefore, the error E indicates that an error has occurred in the OCR when the job flow including noise removal → face recognition → OCR is executed.

That is, as shown in fig. 20 (a), in the work flow of the tilt correction → noise removal → face recognition → OCR → the noise removal → face recognition → OCR is included, and therefore, in accordance with the error E, there is a possibility that an error occurs in the OCR. Further, as shown in fig. 20 (b), in the work flow of noise removal → face recognition → OCR → translation → noise removal → face recognition → OCR is also included, and therefore, in accordance with the error E, there is a possibility that an error occurs in OCR.

In the seventh embodiment, before executing the work flow, it is checked whether or not there is a module combination corresponding to the substitute error information list in the work flow (the part other than the module is registered as a wildcard), and if the corresponding generation module and front module group are included in the work flow definition, a substitute error is notified.

Fig. 21 shows an operation flow of the seventh embodiment.

First, in step S124, a record list L registered as wildcards is acquired from the database, excluding the front module group and the generation module. In the next step S126, a match between a part of the job flow to be executed and the combination of the preceding module group and the occurrence module of the record in L is retrieved.

In the next step S128, it is determined whether there is a matching substitution error between a part of the workflow to be executed and the combination of the front module group and the occurrence module of the record in L. If it is determined that there is a matching substitution error, the process proceeds to step S130, where the user is notified of the matching substitution error, and the process ends. On the other hand, if it is determined in step S128 that there is no matching substitution error, the flow proceeds to step S132, and the entire process flow shown in fig. 4 is executed to end the process.

Fig. 22 shows an operation flow of the eighth embodiment.

In the eighth embodiment, whether an error occurs is confirmed before registering a workflow definition.

In the eighth embodiment, compared with the seventh embodiment, steps S134 and S136 are provided instead of steps S130 and S132 of the seventh embodiment.

That is, when the workflow definition is created, if it is determined in step S128 that there is a matching substitute error, the process proceeds to step S134, and the administrator is notified that the workflow definition cannot be added, and the process is terminated. That is, addition of the workflow definition is prohibited. On the other hand, if it is determined in step S128 that there is no matching substitute error, the flow proceeds to step S136, the job flow definition is registered in the flow definition repository (shown in fig. 3), and the process ends.

In the eighth embodiment, the same steps as those in the seventh embodiment are denoted by the same reference numerals in fig. 22, and description thereof is omitted.

In the eighth embodiment, addition of the workflow definition is prohibited, but a warning may be issued to a user or a manager.

In the above embodiments, the failure information provided to the user is not limited to the above information, and may be any information related to a failure.

In the above embodiments, the processor is a processor in a broad sense, and includes a general-purpose processor (e.g., CPU), a dedicated processor (e.g., GPU: Graphics Processing Unit, ASIC: Application Specific Integrated Circuit, FPGA: Field Programmable Gate Array, Programmable logic device, etc.).

Note that the operation of the processor in each of the above embodiments may be performed not only by one processor but also by cooperation of a plurality of processors located at physically separate locations. The order of the operations of the processor is not limited to the order described in the above embodiments, and may be changed as needed.

Claims

1. An information processing apparatus has a processor,

the processor stores the failure information and the failure information,

when a failure occurs in a series of processes executed according to a definition relating to the order of a plurality of unit processing units, a user is presented with failure information corresponding to the failure that has occurred, among the failure information stored in the processor,

when the failure information stored in the processor does not include failure information corresponding to the failure that has occurred, the unit processing unit in which the failure has occurred and the unit processing unit ahead of the unit processing unit are associated with each other and stored as new failure information.

2. The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein when the failure information stored in the processor includes a plurality of pieces of failure information in which a predetermined number or more of the unit processing units in which a failure has occurred are identical to a plurality of pieces of failure information in which the unit processing units ahead of the unit processing units, the processor unifies the predetermined number or more of pieces of failure information.

3. The information processing apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the failure information includes information on a failure occurrence status of a unit processing unit in which a failure has occurred and input information of the unit processing unit, and the processor unifies the failure information of a predetermined number or more when the failure information stored in the processor includes a plurality of pieces of failure information in which the unit processing units in which a failure has occurred are the same, the unit processing units ahead of the unit processing units are different, and the information on the failure occurrence status and the input information are the same.

4. The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the processor searches whether or not the same definition as the failure information relating the unit processing unit in which the failure has occurred and the unit processing unit located ahead of the unit processing unit is included in the definition before executing the series of processes, and presents a search result to the user.

5. The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the processor, when registering a definition relating to an order of the plurality of unit processing units, searches whether or not the same definition as the failure information relating to the unit processing unit in which the failure has occurred and the unit processing unit ahead of the unit processing unit is included in the definition, and presents a search result to the user.

6. The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the processor, when registering a definition relating to a combination of the plurality of unit processing units, searches whether or not the same definition as the failure information relating to the unit processing unit in which the failure has occurred and the unit processing unit located ahead of the unit processing unit is included in the definition, and prohibits reception of the processing from the user when the search result indicates that the failure information is included.

7. A recording medium having a program recorded thereon for causing a computer to execute the steps of:

storing fault information;

presenting, to a user, failure information corresponding to the failure that has occurred, among the stored failure information, when the failure has occurred in a series of processes executed according to a definition relating to an order of a plurality of unit processing units; and

and storing, when the stored failure information does not include failure information corresponding to the failure that has occurred, the unit processing unit in which the failure has occurred and the unit processing unit ahead of the unit processing unit in association with each other as new failure information.

8. An information processing method comprising:

storing the fault information;

when the stored failure information does not include failure information corresponding to the failure that has occurred, the unit processing unit in which the failure has occurred and the unit processing unit ahead of the unit processing unit are associated with each other and stored as new failure information.